(
link)
Is Björn Dahlem pretentious or cringe? Both? Cringe because it's so begging for approval; amassing enough of its whatever to eventually self-monumentalize, undeniably there. Pretentious because it backpads its mass with talk of astronomy or whatever "science." Maybe that's the cringe. Either way. This looks like shitty Björn Dahlem. Which would be a compliment, it's got neither the sniveling people-pleasing, nor seemingly any reason to exist at all. Which again, is a compliment, I'm not sure why its coming across as an insult. Maybe that's your fault. Why do we like when an artwork makes no attempt at pleasure, all those monochromes steadfast refusal? Do we have some type of aesthetic kink?
See too: "[The internet says] there is a spectrum between "based" and "cringe." And also that binaries are insipid. That there is a third option, the only true "baseness" is through "cringe." A zoomer divide analogous to GenX's authentic/corporate divide (grunge fully Hegelianated into hyperpop, Pop 2.) But so, point: interest comes from synthesis."
"These kinks sound a lot like a voluntary anhedonia, defined as an inability to feel pleasure, a distinct symptom of depression. But while search volume for “depression (syndrome)” as well as “depression treatment” are actually falling, searches for “Anhedonia” are rising perhaps as people search useful diagnostic terms. While these aforementioned and trending kinks enact this distance-from-pleasure themselves. The theory here, is that people wish to “own” their pain"
